- 181 -
tional and/or otherwise improper selective enforcement of the tax
laws against petitioner, Radcliffe, and BOT. To support that
contention, petitioner asserts that, under the circumstances
relating to those determinations that he alleges on brief are
present here, all of the factors discussed in 1 Weinstein &
Berger, Weinstein's Evidence, par. 300[02], at 300-7 to 300-8
(1995), favor creation of such a presumption. Petitioner offers
no analysis of those factors or of their application, if any, to
the facts and circumstances presented in these cases.
The circumstances on which petitioner relies in support of
his position for the creation of a presumption under rule 301 of
the Federal Rules of Evidence include his allegations on brief
that (1) the back-to-back loan transaction involved in Rev. Rul.
87-89, supra, was, and the National Office of the Service was
aware that it was, commonplace at the time that ruling was is-
sued; (2) although the retroactive effect of that ruling was not
limited by the Commissioner under section 7805(b), the general
administrative practice of the Service was to apply it prospec-
tively only; and (3) respondent's examining agent who proposed
the deficiencies relating to the Bank transactions bore personal
animosity toward petitioner.
We note first that, for the reasons discussed below, we are
not willing to accept as facts the allegations on brief on which
petitioner relies in support of his contention that this Court
should create a presumption that respondent's determinations in
Page: Previous 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011